Table 2 Region 3-List of Barriers with Clarification
Triggering Question: "What are barriers for your region to what "ought to be done" to create a sustainable model of assistive technology to support students in accessing and progressing in the general education curriculum?"
Barrier 1: A LACK OF VESTED INTEREST FROM ALL STAKEHOLDERS This could be very complex but basically what I mean is that a gen ed teacher has a student who needs AT and they don't see why AT should be part of their job. They don't see the need to become fully a part of the process. Whether it is a parent or anyone coming to the table they do not think it is as important as we do. Q - Who do you mean by "they?" Do you mean AT people? A - I think there are AT people but I think there are also others.
Barrier 2: TIME TO IMPLEMENT TRAINING FOR STAFF, PARENTS, AND STUDENTS In terms of time to implement time for training, the situation we tend to think about in our districts is, as an example, if one of us has a student who has a specific need for technology such as an iPod, we go to the ISD for training, we get the training, come back to the home school and are supposed to train everyone, the students & staff, and maintain that training at home on an on-going basis for the parents experiencing the device for the first time. It is very time intensive. Then go back to train the rest of the district and let everyone know all about the device, example dynavox. It takes a lot of time, too.
Barrier 3: DIFFERING VIEWS OF A CHILD'S POTENTIAL What I mean is that there is a different view of how they reach the curriculum. If we just give them labs are they going to meet the curriculum? We could have AT supplements and not be as dependent on the staff.
Barrier 4: NO SENSE OF URGENCY Appears there's no sense of urgency in ensuring that a student is successful in their educational environment with use of AT and education in general. Q - who do you see as the biggest culprit in the biggest sense of urgency? A - parents, teachers, special educators, everybody wants to pass it off as someone else's responsibility. Q- what district are you in? A- I cover Muskegon County, hopefully it's only characteristic of things there.
Barrier 5: MISUNDERSTANDING OR LACK OF KNOWLEDGE REGARDING DIFFERENTIATION AMONG STUDENT POPULATIONS This is geared toward the gen ed population and the acceptance that students are not robots that if we all get the same product it is okay how we get there. What I see is that everyone gets the same piece of paper the same items. I am not seeing enough differentiation and am not sure if it is teacher knowledge or not. We hear that it will be a "distraction for other students" and "not fair" but I think the big piece is that students are not robots we are all different.
Barrier 6: LACK OF FORMALIZED APPROACH TO IMPLEMENTING TECH INTO THE CLASSROOM In my county it's a matter of not enough people. We don't have an AT tech person, which falls under technology, not enough people to cover enough hats. Q - is it the approach that's lacking or personnel? A - it's both actually.
Barrier 7: LACK OF COLLABORATION BETWEEN ASSISTIVE TECH CONSULTANTS AND CONSULTANTS FOR RTI AND THE CURRICULUM CONSULTANTS This is at the ISD level. There was a time when members of the AT team met with the curriculum consultants but that stopped a year ago. We have RTI consultants that work with districts and I have not worked with them at all. I am not sure if they are using AT or not and they may be using it. No one from AT has worked with them and to be honest I did not think about it until I was sitting here at this table. C - They disbanded the curriculum consultants and that might be why you have not heard from them. C - A lot originates with the curriculum consultants.
Barrier 8: LACK OF A CONSISTENT PROCESS FOR IDENTIFYING AND DELIVERING ALTERNATIVE INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS We get a lot of requests from teachers and parents wishing to find alternative materials for text, digital, audio, etc. We have no consistent process to work through what does a student need, what format, where to find the format, how to create it. It's recreating the wheel every time. C - I think one of mine relates directly to yours about not having a database, a repository of information how people can access what's available and how we're going to get it. Aleco explained that if the statements are similar, we don't want to delete them.
Barrier 9: [DELETE] LACK OF COLLABORATION TO ENSURE ONGOING EFFECTIVENESS OF ASSISTIVE TECH DELETED
Barrier 10: THE PERPETUATION OF THE 'EXPERT' MODEL Feel that especially in our smaller counties, we cling to the expert model. Not only are we doing, it's perpetuating meaning administrators in general may not see the need to fund more than just one person for AT or may not have the money to do it. We tend to even as an AT person, we may like that feeling of we're the only one in the county that knows this stuff, and it keeps perpetuating, Example, we're meeting today and would like to get your county to come here. If that one AT person can't make it, there is nobody else to make it. Shouldn't be that way. There are AT people who are teachers. I think that using that model is not effective. We can't get out of it. We need to get out of it.
Barrier 11: IDENTIFYING STAKEHOLDERS TO IMPLEMENT A SUSTAINABLE MODEL This was generated because in our district we are trying to raise our AT team. It is simply falling apart. We need leaders to come in and determine how we are going to implement AT and have it pushed down to the locals.
Barrier 12: DIFFERING VIEWS REGARDING THE LEVEL OF NEED/ EXPERTISE FOR ASSISTIVE TECH PERSONNEL This applies to both k12 and IHE; need for experts in assistive technology
Barrier 13: NOT ENOUGH STAFF TO SUPPORT TECH Often in our district, I work in a school district where the IT installs something and then walks away and then it quits working. We don't have enough people to help.
Barrier 14: UNDERSTANDING ASSISTIVE TECH IS A TOOL TO ENGAGE STUDENT PARTICIPATION Basically too many times teachers feel that AT allow students an unfair advantage rather than understanding that it is truly a tool that is going to engage in the curriculum.
Barrier 15: ACCESS TO TEACHING STAFF FOR PD It is not only a time issue but the staff are supposed to be in the classroom all day so finding ways to access them for PD is difficult. It is hard to get them out of the building and rightly so because some staff are gone over and over.
Barrier 16: LACK OF PD FOR ALL STAFF - GEN ED AND SPEC ED - IN ASSISTIVE TECH I think a lot of you might agree with me when doing workshops people who come to the workshop are other special ed teachers not general ed. In our county several of our districts have bought special software with stimulus money. If general ed people understand how it works they could mentor students and each other. Not just special ed teachers need to know about it but general ed need to know it, too. C - I understand what you're saying about how some districts have stimulus money.
Barrier 17: WITHIN HIGHER EDUCATION GEN EDUCATORS MISUNDERSTANDING OR POTENTIALLY NEGATIVE PERCEPTIONS OF THE ROLE OF ASSISTIVE TECH It continues on with what Rosanne is saying and is a similar situation in higher ed. It has taken us 8 yrs to get a course on UDL and in-part it is based on competing factors. But it is also due to getting gen ed to understand what spec ed is. It is also important because the gen ed students get spec ed training but not true of the gen ed staff. It is a lengthy process to get that changed.
Barrier 18: INSUFFICIENT FUNDS FOR ASSISTIVE TECH DEVICES AND ESPECIALLY FOR PD/TRAINING ON THE DEVICE Regarding insufficient funds, I hear from our local district that they do not have the funds to fund any devices for students. The expectations of the ISD are out there to do that. Once the device happens to come, it is expected of the AT person to train them when she herself may not have been trained on it myself. I have to learn how to use the device and train, so on. I'm saying that if there were funds out there allocated for the devices for the local districts, it would be awesome. Maybe we could bring in pd for the staff person, students, parent and AT person to learn how to use them. As I am an AT person, I don't know all and do all. Q - do you see this issue occurring not just when the device is delivered but looking at training throughout the upcoming year to monitor? For example usage to field questions and problems that come up? A - yes, the follow up we lack in our process on the follow up, which is probably another question in here on follow up, making sure the device is used and use properly.
Barrier 19: LACK OF EXPOSURE TO DIFFERENT ASSISTIVE TECH DEVICES AND SYSTEMS This piggy backs on the one above. Not that schools are reluctant to purchase but if you don’t know what is out there it is hard to know what to purchase. Sometimes things are purchased and when they go to implement them with a student they do not meet student’s needs. When businesses come in and present products they need to know that we have limited funds and they need to let us know what difficulties we will have with that product or where it might cause us problems. Comment goes with number 16 - We are limited on how we can use stimulus money. We cannot train gen ed on PD with these funds. This went to number 16 where there is lack of training for PD.
Barrier 20: THE TEACHERS UNWILLINGNESS TO ALLOW STUDENTS TO USE ASSISTIVE TECH DUE TO FAIRNESS ISSUE It might be a delete as it goes along with differential. When called into the classroom we come up with accommodations, AT, and teachers are frustrated. When talk about what would benefit the student, the teacher says "I can't do that. It’s not fair to give students a device when others don't have it. It's a barrier. The students don't mind if other students use it. It's the teachers who have the block with the accommodation or modification.
Barrier 21: LACK OF A DATA COLLECTION SYSTEM TO ASSESS THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ASSISTIVE TECH I was in a large school, Grand Rapids Public school. We are trying to develop a new model for AT. It has been going out for each student that has AT needs and then collecting them at the end of the year. We did not have data collection so I cannot say if it is effective or ineffective. This year we are training people at each building. We are trying to get effective data collection. Q - My question is do you not use standardized testing? A - No we have not. We are including that in our new data collection system. We are going to use that but we have not. Q - When you say whether "it is working or not?" Working in terms of what? A - Working in the sense of using it. I think we distribute AT for student and it does not get used. We have to look at specific outcomes. In the past we have said handwriting is a problem but we need to narrow that focus and find out more specifically what that problem is. Q-This appears to be a 2-fold piece- data collection at individual level (IEP) and data collection at district level to determine AT A-At least 2 parts - ID data for which target behavior; trying to develop something now but tough - sometimes behavior, sometimes something else C-Very dependent on the type of AT used as well.
Barrier 22: STAFF FEELING OVERWHELMED WITH NEW REQUIREMENTS AND EXPECTATIONS Every classroom I walked into this year, teachers are exhausted. If I walk in and give them one more suggestion, some type of communication and AT system, they look at me and say "I just don't have time, can't take any more right now." They're too overwhelmed.
Barrier 23: [DELETE] CONFLICT BETWEEN OLD SCHOOL AND NEW SCHOOL IDEAS ON HOW TO DELIVER CURRICULUM
Barrier 24: SOME INFLEXIBILITY BY STAFF BECAUSE ASSISTIVE TECH ADAPTATIONS MAY BE PERCEIVED AS MORE WORK Thinking more in terms of high tech equipment. We have some beautiful things that work like the smartboard and those familiar with the chalkboard say they don't want to do that , don't want to even start it. They would rather do it the old way even though the new way may provide some opportunity for other people.
Barrier 25: THE DIFFICULTY IN DEALING WITH PARENTS WHO ARE INDIFFERENT TO TRAINING AND EDUCATION What I mean is, and I am sure you have experienced this, the parents who send their kids to school but they don’t want to know anything. They are required to send their kids to school by law but that’s it. I think it is self-explanatory unless you have questions.
Barrier 26: THE LACK OF ACCESSIBILITY TO QUALITY STUDENT LITERATURE AT THE ELEMENTARY LEVEL One of the biggest struggles at the elementary level, in terms of accessibility to curriculum content, is the fact that if we need large print, audio format, etc, we can't get the same text the classrooms are using. There's a lot of reading levels in alternate formats. It's quite the challenge in terms of time and energy to recreate something that a publisher could provide in digital format with a minimal cost.
Barrier 27: THE NEED FOR FOCUSED COLLABORATION My day is pretty busy and when I want to learn new things I only want to learn about things that are of interest to me. I know the breadth of AT is large but when I need something I need something Q - Do you mean you don't want to go through the paperwork but just give me what I need for the kids? A - That might be part of it. I used to go to region meetings and they were effective sometimes and not other times. So I stopped going. I think we need an effective way to share information.
Barrier 28: LACK OF COLLABORATION WITH OUR STATES STANDARDIZED ASSESSMENT PROGRAM AND WHAT IS ACCEPTABLE ACCOMMODATIONS This is a big issue for those of us who teach resource rooms especially. With MEAP students are expected to take the MEAP. A lot of students with a disability in reading are not at grade level. When we try to introduce audio, digital text, we can’t use on MEAP. They can in math and social studies but not in reading. Doesn't make sense because we're offering AT during the school day but yet when testing at this wonderful standardized testing that we have, they won't pass. They're not given any kind of AT to do so. For example, for our students at middle school, it was put out on our website that it was because of the special ed students that we didn’t get our AYP. If it's a parent, I'm going to be a little bit upset with that. You're giving them the test but they're expected to pass it. It's something that I'm passionate about because I work with the students on the MEAP. Goes along with AT, if we let them use it in class why can't we use on the test? Where is the boundary when they take the tests. Q - problem with test or testing students at their reading level? A - both because of accommodations. State will accommodate for audio, science, and math but not for reading. Also do not let them test at their own grade level. It's always at grade level, not what level they are working at. C-this is my giant pet peeve. Until the state of Michigan changes the definition of reading, we are stuck in the loop. Please write this down: State of Michigan change the definition.
Barrier 29: WE LACK TEAMS TO SUPPORT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ASSISTIVE TECH We lack people to do it well. I think it reminds me of what someone else said we put it out there and they don't use it. I think I can say it is the same as 13. Comment made by author later during the Co-Lab: We deleted it because we thought that it addressed not enough staff to address tech. I think it is partially the same but it is not just tech teams of support but it is also teachers currently using the tech instructional strategies for implementation and curriculum connections.
Barrier 30: THE PRESENCE OF A DEFENSIVE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DISTRICTS AND FAMILIES Sometimes especially with AT we come to the table already thinking the worst of each other, the parent comes with expectations of what should be in place for them, district comes prepared with what cannot take place for the student, for sake of the argument.
Barrier 31: LACK OF INCLUSION MODEL - WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE AND HOW IT IS SUPPORTED This refers to students with disabilities in the gen ed setting. We are told by the state we need to have 80 % of kids in general ed classroom 80% of time, but the teachers are not sure how to implement accommodations. A lot of the things students need to be supported on they are not and there is a lack of ability to create a way to do that in the classroom and district.
Barrier 32: NO CLEAR PATH I'm sure this goes along with somebody else’s. Saying that sometimes I don't even know where to start, other times I know where to start but not what to do next. I see all these things of what could help the student. There's no definite path of what to do such as A, B, C, D. I’m not saying there will be but saying we need something closer than what we have now. Don't have a thorough decision making process.
Barrier 33: THE INADEQUACIES OF THE CURRENT STATUS OF TECH AVAILABLE IN SOME SCHOOLS This is fairly self-explanatory. Some buildings have great equipment and in others you can't find working printers. I think that is really going to be a barrier.
Barrier 34: LIMITATIONS BY STATE AND FEDERAL USE OF FUNDS There are limitations on the stimulus. We wanted to use it more in an inclusion model but were told to prorate those funds and put in the general ed fund. We were limited when wanting to put in a really cool AT model.
Barrier 35: DIFFERENT VIEWS ON HOW MUCH ASSISTIVE TECH SHOULD BE PERMITTED FOR USE BY STUDENTS Specifically, I was speaking to iPods, iPhones, and how we don't let them be used in the schools or classrooms. And there are differing views on whether they can be used in schools and classrooms because they are not always used appropriately. Also, whether they are viewed as something that students can use for school work. Q- Do you include blocked websites or different things at school that can be accessed at home? A - I could amend that into it as well.
Barrier 36: LACK OF ACTUAL IMPLEMENTATION AFTER TRAINING Think it goes beyond. There were others about needing staff to do it, other issues involved in terms of follow up. We have staff come to trainings but don't know if staff actually go back and use the things.
Barrier 37: THE TIME ELEMENT REQUIRED FOR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT I’m not sure, and other people can tell me if it is similar to their situation. All the calendars are different along with the days and hours and getting all of the people involved with one student together for PD is difficult. I think it is pretty pervasive. I think it is in regards to all the PD for technology and devices.
Barrier 38: LIMITED USE OF ALTERNATIVE MODELS OF PD As it's been mentioned several times about lack of time, resources, and pd, we also are not accessing all the alternative models that are being used outside the environment, virtual pd, webcasts, all of that. When using those, staff don't have familiarity. We haven’t provided them training and therefore no success, therefore not implementing them. Q - I was thinking more by alternative models. I wasn't thinking of the examples you gave, thinking more of teaching people in a differentiated way. A - That's included as well.
Barrier 39: LACK OF AN ORGANIZED DATABASE FOR ACCESSIBLE CURRICULUM MATERIALS There are different pockets of stuff here and there but it would be great if there was a state repository where people could go to find materials whether it be podcast, RFB&D, bookshare or whatever. Q - Are you referring to that as a local database just the district or region? A - Not sure but if there was a place to go where people could go to get started.
Barrier 40: THE LACK OF PHYSICAL SPACE, TIME, AND FLEXIBILITY WITHIN SCHOOLS FOR EFFICIENT USE OF TECH Would first like to add to the statement: lack of physical space but time and flexibility. It takes time if we need to accommodate these assignments. We sometimes have to scan using for example, a reading pen. If student comes for an assignment, we need a place for all of this stuff. My room was small, cramped. I had a lot of the technology, however, wasn't a great place for it, need space and time to be able to do that. Takes time to train but need to be able to do it at the moment. A lot of times a student will say, we need so and so because we're ready to do reading. You're constantly interrupted when trying to do this AT. The flexibility of teachers allowing students to come knowing it is a learning process.
Barrier 41: INADEQUATE TRAINING OF PROVIDERS - SCHOOL TO HOME I think of a provider as myself, classroom teacher, classroom assistant, support staff - I hope that includes everyone. We are not spending enough time and money to make sure that we are doing what we are supposed to do.
Barrier 42: BURN-OUT In this time of change, we're trying to change how we're doing AT and it seems that's when the burnout gets noticable. When talking with my new friend, Ellen, we discussed that the burnout tends to hit the older population or people doing it the longest. I thought it was an interesting proven fact.
Barrier 43: MINIMAL USE OF A THOROUGH DECISION-MAKINNG PROCESS This has been mentioned before. I think this is because we sometimes provide tools with some assessment but we do not have a set process in place. We are trying to use the SETT process but we use it minimally. Sometimes we drop off tools with little consideration for the right tool implementation follow-up. C- I think this goes with 32. Kindy- I feel that knowing what we will do with the discussion tomorrow we will be able to compare this one by the other if we leave them. C - I think if I were better at talking I think I would have said we don’t have a thorough decision making process. Kindy says minimal use and I think we do not have one and that is the difference.
Barrier 44: CONFLICT BETWEEN GEN ED AND SPECIAL ED General ed and special ed don't know what each other does. And they don't feel comfortable with their differences. Example, in my experience general ed teachers tend to think that special ed teacher's don't do as much work and spec ed teachers tend to feel threatened by general ed teachers, don’t' know content, when there is that conflict. There's not a trust relationship with them. It's very difficult for the student who has the need.
Barrier 45: FAILURE FOR ALL PLAYERS TO PLAY NICELY An important part of this is that we don't always know who all the players are. Me, I may not know who all the players are and we don't play nicely. We don't realize that parents and higher ed are players and often we don't work together and cooperate.
Barrier 46: INADEQUATE LEVEL OF EVALUATION TOOLS AND EQUIPMENT It was mentioned earlier about shopping based on what a vendor might offer. If we had a system in place with more equipment available where people could borrow for more than a few weeks as a tool, that would benefit a student. Maybe to expand at the state level. Q - are you also including vendors in that component? A - if they'd like.
Barrier 47: NEGATIVE PERCEPTION BY OTHERS OR STIGMA BY STUDENTS THEMSELVES WHO NEED TO USE THE ASSISTIVE TECH IN GEN ED CLASSROOMS Students feel like they are different and they don’t want to stand out. Students don’t want to be different and they know they already stand out and they are very hesitant because they don’t want to stick out. They will use the Fusion in the spec ed classroom but not in the gen ed room.
Barrier 48: LACK OF STAFF'S EMPOWERMENT AND PASSION TO STATE THEIR WANTS AND NEEDS The cheese stands alone. Many times I've been speaking to staff individually, have an idea, they encourage it and reinforce it, but there's nobody there to stand up and say yea I could do that. They wait for the administrator's lead before they get involved. No passion to get empowered and involved to state what they want and need. Q - also in relation to stating the wants and needs for a particular student they are supporting? A - yes
Barrier 49: ABSENCE OF MENTORING RELATIONSHIPS New teachers have a teacher mentor and I think a mentoring relationship for teachers learning something new like tech would be beneficial. I think it would be useful for someone learning tech or having a student with tech to have a mentor.
Barrier 50: POOR COMMUNICATION I'm meaning this on a global scale. For example we're going to generate a lot of information here in the next 2 days, we'll have all this info to share but a lot will go back and not communicate what we've done. Lots of time we do have people but they don't go back and share that info with important players. Lack of communication and support is a huge issue.
Barrier 51: STAFF CHANGES It’s difficult when staff changes and people take their place because they need to go through notes and build relationships with the staff and students. It is like starting over to begin building those relationships.
Barrier 52: PROCESS ORIENTED VS. CONTENT ORIENTED INSTRUCTION I think one of the things I've noticed with resource room students, it's too easy to just get them by. Teachers can get anybody to pass easily, when it comes to some of those assignments they might bring to us, do students really understand and know how to find it, or do we just want to pass them. Part of what I do with AT is to teach students to go about learning in a different way and how to advocate for themselves that they need to learn in a different way. It's not about learning what to learn, not just a matter of getting it one. It's hard to do this AT because I want to focus more on that process, it takes time. Instead of just focusing on "let's just get this done, you end up not getting things done in a timely manner.
Barrier 53: [DELETE] LACK OF AVAILABLE TECH DELETE
Barrier 54: HIT AND RUN Typically an AT person will deliver a product and not have follow through. It's boom, you've done your job, there's your equipment and I'll pick it up at the end of school year. Is his behavior improving, etc. It's the hit and run. Q- Are you thinking that hit and runs need a certain time frame for follow up or saying it's the typical boom and your done? A - hit and run need a time frame but also need data to help them know what to do when they are in there and doing follow through. There's a lot of things involved, not only time but the data collection to know if that is their right device, the student having right curriculum, etc. C - you have staff with experience in hit and run, negative perception, no desire to put any more effort towards it. C - I totally agree that the hit and run philosophy brings bad feelings on everybody.
Barrier 55: LACK OF ACCOUNTABILITY OF GENERAL ED TEACHERS FOR SPECIAL ED STUDENTS AND THEIR DIFFERENTIATED NEEDS This goes with other resource students and students who are in a self contained classroom like CI. If they need to go to the general ed. classroom, they're asked to have them just color. We hear just give them something to color, do you have a workbook. It actually happened with a student given papers by the special ed. teacher to do in the classroom, general ed. teacher had asked for the work, never checked the work, child did problems incorrectly, it was a hands off kind of thing in my classroom but don't have to be accountable. It's almost like a babysitting thing. With AT we're sending those kids to general ed. classrooms. They have to be accountable for these kids as much as they can.
Table 2 Region 3-List of Barriers with Clarification
Triggering Question: "What are barriers for your region to what "ought to be done" to create a sustainable model of assistive technology to support students in accessing and progressing in the general education curriculum?"
Barrier 1: A LACK OF VESTED INTEREST FROM ALL STAKEHOLDERS
This could be very complex but basically what I mean is that a gen ed teacher has a student who needs AT and they don't see why AT should be part of their job. They don't see the need to become fully a part of the process. Whether it is a parent or anyone coming to the table they do not think it is as important as we do.
Q - Who do you mean by "they?" Do you mean AT people?
A - I think there are AT people but I think there are also others.
Barrier 2: TIME TO IMPLEMENT TRAINING FOR STAFF, PARENTS, AND STUDENTS
In terms of time to implement time for training, the situation we tend to think about in our districts is, as an example, if one of us has a student who has a specific need for technology such as an iPod, we go to the ISD for training, we get the training, come back to the home school and are supposed to train everyone, the students & staff, and maintain that training at home on an on-going basis for the parents experiencing the device for the first time. It is very time intensive. Then go back to train the rest of the district and let everyone know all about the device, example dynavox. It takes a lot of time, too.
Barrier 3: DIFFERING VIEWS OF A CHILD'S POTENTIAL
What I mean is that there is a different view of how they reach the curriculum. If we just give them labs are they going to meet the curriculum? We could have AT supplements and not be as dependent on the staff.
Barrier 4: NO SENSE OF URGENCY
Appears there's no sense of urgency in ensuring that a student is successful in their educational environment with use of AT and education in general.
Q - who do you see as the biggest culprit in the biggest sense of urgency?
A - parents, teachers, special educators, everybody wants to pass it off as someone else's responsibility.
Q- what district are you in?
A- I cover Muskegon County, hopefully it's only characteristic of things there.
Barrier 5: MISUNDERSTANDING OR LACK OF KNOWLEDGE REGARDING DIFFERENTIATION AMONG STUDENT POPULATIONS
This is geared toward the gen ed population and the acceptance that students are not robots that if we all get the same product it is okay how we get there. What I see is that everyone gets the same piece of paper the same items. I am not seeing enough differentiation and am not sure if it is teacher knowledge or not. We hear that it will be a "distraction for other students" and "not fair" but I think the big piece is that students are not robots we are all different.
Barrier 6: LACK OF FORMALIZED APPROACH TO IMPLEMENTING TECH INTO THE CLASSROOM
In my county it's a matter of not enough people. We don't have an AT tech person, which falls under technology, not enough people to cover enough hats.
Q - is it the approach that's lacking or personnel?
A - it's both actually.
Barrier 7: LACK OF COLLABORATION BETWEEN ASSISTIVE TECH CONSULTANTS AND CONSULTANTS FOR RTI AND THE CURRICULUM CONSULTANTS
This is at the ISD level. There was a time when members of the AT team met with the curriculum consultants but that stopped a year ago. We have RTI consultants that work with districts and I have not worked with them at all. I am not sure if they are using AT or not and they may be using it. No one from AT has worked with them and to be honest I did not think about it until I was sitting here at this table.
C - They disbanded the curriculum consultants and that might be why you have not heard from them.
C - A lot originates with the curriculum consultants.
Barrier 8: LACK OF A CONSISTENT PROCESS FOR IDENTIFYING AND DELIVERING ALTERNATIVE INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS
We get a lot of requests from teachers and parents wishing to find alternative materials for text, digital, audio, etc. We have no consistent process to work through what does a student need, what format, where to find the format, how to create it. It's recreating the wheel every time.
C - I think one of mine relates directly to yours about not having a database, a repository of information how people can access what's available and how we're going to get it. Aleco explained that if the statements are similar, we don't want to delete them.
Barrier 9: [DELETE] LACK OF COLLABORATION TO ENSURE ONGOING EFFECTIVENESS OF ASSISTIVE TECH
DELETED
Barrier 10: THE PERPETUATION OF THE 'EXPERT' MODEL
Feel that especially in our smaller counties, we cling to the expert model. Not only are we doing, it's perpetuating meaning administrators in general may not see the need to fund more than just one person for AT or may not have the money to do it. We tend to even as an AT person, we may like that feeling of we're the only one in the county that knows this stuff, and it keeps perpetuating, Example, we're meeting today and would like to get your county to come here. If that one AT person can't make it, there is nobody else to make it. Shouldn't be that way. There are AT people who are teachers. I think that using that model is not effective. We can't get out of it. We need to get out of it.
Barrier 11: IDENTIFYING STAKEHOLDERS TO IMPLEMENT A SUSTAINABLE MODEL
This was generated because in our district we are trying to raise our AT team. It is simply falling apart. We need leaders to come in and determine how we are going to implement AT and have it pushed down to the locals.
Barrier 12: DIFFERING VIEWS REGARDING THE LEVEL OF NEED/ EXPERTISE FOR ASSISTIVE TECH PERSONNEL
This applies to both k12 and IHE; need for experts in assistive technology
Barrier 13: NOT ENOUGH STAFF TO SUPPORT TECH
Often in our district, I work in a school district where the IT installs something and then walks away and then it quits working. We don't have enough people to help.
Barrier 14: UNDERSTANDING ASSISTIVE TECH IS A TOOL TO ENGAGE STUDENT PARTICIPATION
Basically too many times teachers feel that AT allow students an unfair advantage rather than understanding that it is truly a tool that is going to engage in the curriculum.
Barrier 15: ACCESS TO TEACHING STAFF FOR PD
It is not only a time issue but the staff are supposed to be in the classroom all day so finding ways to access them for PD is difficult. It is hard to get them out of the building and rightly so because some staff are gone over and over.
Barrier 16: LACK OF PD FOR ALL STAFF - GEN ED AND SPEC ED - IN ASSISTIVE TECH
I think a lot of you might agree with me when doing workshops people who come to the workshop are other special ed teachers not general ed. In our county several of our districts have bought special software with stimulus money. If general ed people understand how it works they could mentor students and each other.
Not just special ed teachers need to know about it but general ed need to know it, too.
C - I understand what you're saying about how some districts have stimulus money.
Barrier 17: WITHIN HIGHER EDUCATION GEN EDUCATORS MISUNDERSTANDING OR POTENTIALLY NEGATIVE PERCEPTIONS OF THE ROLE OF ASSISTIVE TECH
It continues on with what Rosanne is saying and is a similar situation in higher ed. It has taken us 8 yrs to get a course on UDL and in-part it is based on competing factors. But it is also due to getting gen ed to understand what spec ed is. It is also important because the gen ed students get spec ed training but not true of the gen ed staff. It is a lengthy process to get that changed.
Barrier 18: INSUFFICIENT FUNDS FOR ASSISTIVE TECH DEVICES AND ESPECIALLY FOR PD/TRAINING ON THE DEVICE
Regarding insufficient funds, I hear from our local district that they do not have the funds to fund any devices for students. The expectations of the ISD are out there to do that. Once the device happens to come, it is expected of the AT person to train them when she herself may not have been trained on it myself. I have to learn how to use the device and train, so on. I'm saying that if there were funds out there allocated for the devices for the local districts, it would be awesome. Maybe we could bring in pd for the staff person, students, parent and AT person to learn how to use them. As I am an AT person, I don't know all and do all.
Q - do you see this issue occurring not just when the device is delivered but looking at training throughout the upcoming year to monitor? For example usage to field questions and problems that come up?
A - yes, the follow up we lack in our process on the follow up, which is probably another question in here on follow up, making sure the device is used and use properly.
Barrier 19: LACK OF EXPOSURE TO DIFFERENT ASSISTIVE TECH DEVICES AND SYSTEMS
This piggy backs on the one above. Not that schools are reluctant to purchase but if you don’t know what is out there it is hard to know what to purchase. Sometimes things are purchased and when they go to implement them with a student they do not meet student’s needs. When businesses come in and present products they need to know that we have limited funds and they need to let us know what difficulties we will have with that product or where it might cause us problems. Comment goes with number 16 - We are limited on how we can use stimulus money. We cannot train gen ed on PD with these funds. This went to number 16 where there is lack of training for PD.
Barrier 20: THE TEACHERS UNWILLINGNESS TO ALLOW STUDENTS TO USE ASSISTIVE TECH DUE TO FAIRNESS ISSUE
It might be a delete as it goes along with differential.
When called into the classroom we come up with accommodations, AT, and teachers are frustrated. When talk about what would benefit the student, the teacher says "I can't do that. It’s not fair to give students a device when others don't have it.
It's a barrier. The students don't mind if other students use it. It's the teachers who have the block with the accommodation or modification.
Barrier 21: LACK OF A DATA COLLECTION SYSTEM TO ASSESS THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ASSISTIVE TECH
I was in a large school, Grand Rapids Public school. We are trying to develop a new model for AT. It has been going out for each
student that has AT needs and then collecting them at the end of the year. We did not have data collection so I cannot say if it is effective or ineffective. This year we are training people at each building. We are trying to get effective data collection.
Q - My question is do you not use standardized testing?
A - No we have not. We are including that in our new data collection system. We are going to use that but we have not.
Q - When you say whether "it is working or not?" Working in terms of what?
A - Working in the sense of using it. I think we distribute AT for student and it does not get used. We have to look at specific outcomes. In the past we have said handwriting is a problem but we need to narrow that focus and find out more specifically what that problem is.
Q-This appears to be a 2-fold piece- data collection at individual level (IEP) and data collection at district level to determine AT
A-At least 2 parts - ID data for which target behavior; trying to develop something now but tough - sometimes behavior, sometimes something else
C-Very dependent on the type of AT used as well.
Barrier 22: STAFF FEELING OVERWHELMED WITH NEW REQUIREMENTS AND EXPECTATIONS
Every classroom I walked into this year, teachers are exhausted. If I walk in and give them one more suggestion, some type of communication and AT system, they look at me and say "I just don't have time, can't take any more right now." They're too overwhelmed.
Barrier 23: [DELETE] CONFLICT BETWEEN OLD SCHOOL AND NEW SCHOOL IDEAS ON HOW TO DELIVER
CURRICULUM
Barrier 24: SOME INFLEXIBILITY BY STAFF BECAUSE ASSISTIVE TECH ADAPTATIONS MAY BE PERCEIVED AS MORE WORK
Thinking more in terms of high tech equipment. We have some beautiful things that work like the smartboard and those familiar with the chalkboard say they don't want to do that , don't want to even start it. They would rather do it the old way even though the new way may provide some opportunity for other people.
Barrier 25: THE DIFFICULTY IN DEALING WITH PARENTS WHO ARE INDIFFERENT TO TRAINING AND EDUCATION
What I mean is, and I am sure you have experienced this, the parents who send their kids to school but they don’t want to know anything. They are required to send their kids to school by law but that’s it. I think it is self-explanatory unless you have questions.
Barrier 26: THE LACK OF ACCESSIBILITY TO QUALITY STUDENT LITERATURE AT THE ELEMENTARY LEVEL
One of the biggest struggles at the elementary level, in terms of accessibility to curriculum content, is the fact that if we need large print, audio format, etc, we can't get the same text the classrooms are using. There's a lot of reading levels in alternate formats. It's quite the challenge in terms of time and energy to recreate something that a publisher could provide in digital format with a minimal cost.
Barrier 27: THE NEED FOR FOCUSED COLLABORATION
My day is pretty busy and when I want to learn new things I only want to learn about things that are of interest to me. I know the breadth of AT is large but when I need something I need something
Q - Do you mean you don't want to go through the paperwork but just give me what I need for the kids?
A - That might be part of it. I used to go to region meetings and they were effective sometimes and not other times. So I stopped going. I think we need an effective way to share information.
Barrier 28: LACK OF COLLABORATION WITH OUR STATES STANDARDIZED ASSESSMENT PROGRAM AND WHAT IS ACCEPTABLE ACCOMMODATIONS
This is a big issue for those of us who teach resource rooms especially. With MEAP students are expected to take the MEAP. A lot of students with a disability in reading are not at grade level. When we try to introduce audio, digital text, we can’t use on MEAP.
They can in math and social studies but not in reading. Doesn't make sense because we're offering AT during the school day but yet when testing at this wonderful standardized testing that we have, they won't pass. They're not given any kind of AT to do so.
For example, for our students at middle school, it was put out on our website that it was because of the special ed students that we didn’t get our AYP. If it's a parent, I'm going to be a little bit upset with that. You're giving them the test but they're expected to pass it. It's something that I'm passionate about because I work with the students on the MEAP. Goes along with AT, if we let them use it in class why can't we use on the test? Where is the boundary when they take the tests.
Q - problem with test or testing students at their reading level?
A - both because of accommodations. State will accommodate for audio, science, and math but not for reading. Also do not let them test at their own grade level. It's always at grade level, not what level they are working at.
C-this is my giant pet peeve. Until the state of Michigan changes the definition of reading, we are stuck in the loop. Please write this down: State of Michigan change the definition.
Barrier 29: WE LACK TEAMS TO SUPPORT THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ASSISTIVE TECH
We lack people to do it well. I think it reminds me of what someone else said we put it out there and they don't use it. I think I can say it is the same as 13.
Comment made by author later during the Co-Lab: We deleted it because we thought that it addressed not enough staff to address tech. I think it is partially the same but it is not just tech teams of support but it is also teachers currently using the tech instructional strategies for implementation and curriculum connections.
Barrier 30: THE PRESENCE OF A DEFENSIVE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DISTRICTS AND FAMILIES
Sometimes especially with AT we come to the table already thinking the worst of each other, the parent comes with expectations of what should be in place for them, district comes prepared with what cannot take place for the student, for sake of the argument.
Barrier 31: LACK OF INCLUSION MODEL - WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE AND HOW IT IS SUPPORTED
This refers to students with disabilities in the gen ed setting. We are told by the state we need to have 80 % of kids in general ed classroom 80% of time, but the teachers are not sure how to implement accommodations. A lot of the things students need to be supported on they are not and there is a lack of ability to create a way to do that in the classroom and district.
Barrier 32: NO CLEAR PATH
I'm sure this goes along with somebody else’s. Saying that sometimes I don't even know where to start, other times I know where to start but not what to do next. I see all these things of what could help the student. There's no definite path of what to do such as A,
B, C, D. I’m not saying there will be but saying we need something closer than what we have now. Don't have a thorough decision making process.
Barrier 33: THE INADEQUACIES OF THE CURRENT STATUS OF TECH AVAILABLE IN SOME SCHOOLS
This is fairly self-explanatory. Some buildings have great equipment and in others you can't find working printers. I think that is really going to be a barrier.
Barrier 34: LIMITATIONS BY STATE AND FEDERAL USE OF FUNDS
There are limitations on the stimulus. We wanted to use it more in an inclusion model but were told to prorate those funds and put in the general ed fund. We were limited when wanting to put in a really cool AT model.
Barrier 35: DIFFERENT VIEWS ON HOW MUCH ASSISTIVE TECH SHOULD BE
PERMITTED FOR USE BY STUDENTS
Specifically, I was speaking to iPods, iPhones, and how we don't let them be used in the schools or classrooms. And there are differing views on whether they can be used in schools and classrooms because they are not always used appropriately. Also, whether they are viewed as something that students can use for school work.
Q- Do you include blocked websites or different things at school that can be accessed at home?
A - I could amend that into it as well.
Barrier 36: LACK OF ACTUAL IMPLEMENTATION AFTER TRAINING
Think it goes beyond. There were others about needing staff to do it, other issues involved in terms of follow up. We have staff come to trainings but don't know if staff actually go back and use the things.
Barrier 37: THE TIME ELEMENT REQUIRED FOR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
I’m not sure, and other people can tell me if it is similar to their situation. All the calendars are different along with the days and hours and getting all of the people involved with one student together for PD is difficult. I think it is pretty pervasive. I think it is in regards to all the PD for technology and devices.
Barrier 38: LIMITED USE OF ALTERNATIVE MODELS OF PD
As it's been mentioned several times about lack of time, resources, and pd, we also are not accessing all the alternative models that are being used outside the environment, virtual pd, webcasts, all of that. When using those, staff don't have familiarity. We haven’t provided them training and therefore no success, therefore not implementing them.
Q - I was thinking more by alternative models. I wasn't thinking of the examples you gave, thinking more of teaching people in a differentiated way.
A - That's included as well.
Barrier 39: LACK OF AN ORGANIZED DATABASE FOR ACCESSIBLE CURRICULUM MATERIALS
There are different pockets of stuff here and there but it would be great if there was a state repository where people could go to find
materials whether it be podcast, RFB&D, bookshare or whatever.
Q - Are you referring to that as a local database just the district or region?
A - Not sure but if there was a place to go where people could go to get started.
Barrier 40: THE LACK OF PHYSICAL SPACE, TIME, AND FLEXIBILITY WITHIN SCHOOLS FOR EFFICIENT USE OF TECH
Would first like to add to the statement: lack of physical space but time and flexibility.
It takes time if we need to accommodate these assignments. We sometimes have to scan using for example, a reading pen. If student comes for an assignment, we need a place for all of this stuff. My room was small, cramped. I had a lot of the technology, however, wasn't a great place for it, need space and time to be able to do that. Takes time to train but need to be able to do it at the moment. A lot of times a student will say, we need so and so because we're ready to do reading. You're constantly interrupted when trying to do this AT. The flexibility of teachers allowing students to come knowing it is a learning process.
Barrier 41: INADEQUATE TRAINING OF PROVIDERS - SCHOOL TO HOME
I think of a provider as myself, classroom teacher, classroom assistant, support staff - I hope that includes everyone. We are not spending enough time and money to make sure that we are doing what we are supposed to do.
Barrier 42: BURN-OUT
In this time of change, we're trying to change how we're doing AT and it seems that's when the burnout gets noticable. When talking with my new friend, Ellen, we discussed that the burnout tends to hit the older population or people doing it the longest. I thought it was an interesting proven fact.
Barrier 43: MINIMAL USE OF A THOROUGH DECISION-MAKINNG PROCESS
This has been mentioned before. I think this is because we sometimes provide tools with some assessment but we do not have a set process in place. We are trying to use the SETT process but we use it minimally. Sometimes we drop off tools with little consideration for the right tool implementation follow-up.
C- I think this goes with 32.
Kindy- I feel that knowing what we will do with the discussion tomorrow we will be able to compare this one by the other if we leave them.
C - I think if I were better at talking I think I would have said we don’t have a thorough decision making process. Kindy says minimal use and I think we do not have one and that is the difference.
Barrier 44: CONFLICT BETWEEN GEN ED AND SPECIAL ED
General ed and special ed don't know what each other does. And they don't feel comfortable with their differences. Example, in my experience general ed teachers tend to think that special ed teacher's don't do as much work and spec ed teachers tend to feel threatened by general ed teachers, don’t' know content, when there is that conflict. There's not a trust relationship with them. It's very difficult for the student who has the need.
Barrier 45: FAILURE FOR ALL PLAYERS TO PLAY NICELY
An important part of this is that we don't always know who all the players are. Me, I may not know who all the players are and we don't play nicely. We don't realize that parents and higher ed are players and often we don't work together and cooperate.
Barrier 46: INADEQUATE LEVEL OF EVALUATION TOOLS AND EQUIPMENT
It was mentioned earlier about shopping based on what a vendor might offer. If we had a system in place with more equipment available where people could borrow for more than a few weeks as a tool, that would benefit a student. Maybe to expand at the state level.
Q - are you also including vendors in that component?
A - if they'd like.
Barrier 47: NEGATIVE PERCEPTION BY OTHERS OR STIGMA BY STUDENTS THEMSELVES WHO NEED TO USE THE ASSISTIVE TECH IN GEN ED CLASSROOMS
Students feel like they are different and they don’t want to stand out. Students don’t want to be different and they know they already stand out and they are very hesitant because they don’t want to stick out. They will use the Fusion in the spec ed classroom but not in the gen ed room.
Barrier 48: LACK OF STAFF'S EMPOWERMENT AND PASSION TO STATE THEIR WANTS AND NEEDS
The cheese stands alone. Many times I've been speaking to staff individually, have an idea, they encourage it and reinforce it, but there's nobody there to stand up and say yea I could do that. They wait for the administrator's lead before they get involved. No passion to get empowered and involved to state what they want and need.
Q - also in relation to stating the wants and needs for a particular student they are supporting?
A - yes
Barrier 49: ABSENCE OF MENTORING RELATIONSHIPS
New teachers have a teacher mentor and I think a mentoring relationship for teachers learning something new like tech would be beneficial. I think it would be useful for someone learning tech or having a student with tech to have a mentor.
Barrier 50: POOR COMMUNICATION
I'm meaning this on a global scale. For example we're going to generate a lot of information here in the next 2 days, we'll have all this info to share but a lot will go back and not communicate what we've done. Lots of time we do have people but they don't go back and share that info with important players. Lack of communication and support is a huge issue.
Barrier 51: STAFF CHANGES
It’s difficult when staff changes and people take their place because they need to go through notes and build relationships with the staff and students. It is like starting over to begin building those relationships.
Barrier 52: PROCESS ORIENTED VS. CONTENT ORIENTED INSTRUCTION
I think one of the things I've noticed with resource room students, it's too easy to just get them by. Teachers can get anybody to pass easily, when it comes to some of those assignments they might bring to us, do students really understand and know how to find it, or do we just want to pass them. Part of what I do with AT is to teach students to go about learning in a different way and how to advocate for themselves that they need to learn in a different way. It's not about learning what to learn, not just a matter of getting it one. It's hard to do this AT because I want to focus more on that process, it takes time. Instead of just focusing on "let's just get this done, you end up not getting things done in a timely manner.
Barrier 53: [DELETE] LACK OF AVAILABLE TECH
DELETE
Barrier 54: HIT AND RUN
Typically an AT person will deliver a product and not have follow through. It's boom, you've done your job, there's your equipment
and I'll pick it up at the end of school year. Is his behavior improving, etc. It's the hit and run.
Q- Are you thinking that hit and runs need a certain time frame for follow up or saying it's the typical boom and your done?
A - hit and run need a time frame but also need data to help them know what to do when they are in there and doing follow through.
There's a lot of things involved, not only time but the data collection to know if that is their right device, the student having right curriculum, etc.
C - you have staff with experience in hit and run, negative perception, no desire to put any more effort towards it.
C - I totally agree that the hit and run philosophy brings bad feelings on everybody.
Barrier 55: LACK OF ACCOUNTABILITY OF GENERAL ED TEACHERS FOR SPECIAL ED STUDENTS AND THEIR
DIFFERENTIATED NEEDS
This goes with other resource students and students who are in a self contained classroom like CI. If they need to go to the general ed. classroom, they're asked to have them just color. We hear just give them something to color, do you have a workbook. It actually happened with a student given papers by the special ed. teacher to do in the classroom, general ed. teacher had asked for the work, never checked the work, child did problems incorrectly, it was a hands off kind of thing in my classroom but don't have to be accountable. It's almost like a babysitting thing. With AT we're sending those kids to general ed. classrooms. They have to be accountable for these kids as much as they can.